Tuesday, August 25, 2009

It's a lightbulb. You spend millions of pounds of my money jetting around the world, moving from one unnecessary parliament to another using an awful lot of bloody 'carbon footprint' (mine's more of a shoeprint) and you begrudge me reading a book without getting a headache?

Not to mention the nightmare of trying to change an energy saving lightbulb.

When are we going to do something about these people? And what will you do when some grey suited lightbulb transactine executive comes to your local hardwear store? This blog does not condone, and never would condone breaking the law. But it is very keen on the idea of common sense and the moral highground.

6 comments:

I wrote about this last year on the Freedom2Choose forum and it was met with incredulity. Now we know it is no joke. I live in a block of flats which routinely give us 'energy saving' lightbulbs for free and at first we (Mrs. Yin and I) tried to be good citizens and help save the planet by falling for the 'global warming,' 'or is it global cooling?' shite. But here's the rub, since the 'universally loved' smoking ban came in I cannot leave my flat whilst smoking in case I may infect my fellow flat dwellers with evil intent, they have plenty of those lovely red 'no smoking, it's against the law' signs to make me feel I'm a mass murderer.

And then there's the terrestrial (analogue) tv v digital debate??? Sorry, there's no debate, it's a diktat that as from 2012 you have no choice, by order of the government!

I have this nightmare that I've fallen into a cesspool and I can't swim, then I wake up...but I still can't swim!

Why don't you condone breaking the law. I forget who said this but it strikes me as very sensible. Stupid laws should be ignored. It's your _duty_ in fact to break them as often as possible.

I know I'll be doing the rounds of the local light bulb stores and stocking up over the next few days!

And it doesn't seem to be illegal to actually sell these things, merely import them. So if someone can import a few billion of them before 1st september with appropriate documentation then they should be able to keep all of us 'deniers' in light bulbs which don't flicker and can be dimmed for a few years...

Europeans and Americans choose to buy ordinary light bulbs around 9 times out of 10 (light industry data 2007-8)Banning what people want gives the supposed savings - no point in banning an impopular product!

If new LED lights -or improved CFLs- are good,people will buy them - no need to ban ordinary light bulbs (little point).If they are not good, people will not buy them - no need to ban ordinary light bulbs (no point).The arrival of the transistor didn't mean that more energy using radio valves were banned... they were bought less anyway.

Certainly we can think of the environment-however, banning light bulbs is not the way to go...Light bulbs have been safely used for 100+ yearsWe are not talking about lead paint here,and light bulbs do not give out CO2 gas (like cars)...

= power stations give out the emissions, power stations can of course be dealt with directly (CO2 processing and/or energy substitution, as is already planned anyway).

Ironically the environmentally questionable CFL lights are the one being promoted - in another world, those mercury containing bulbs would be the ones banned!

For all reasons why banning bulbs is wrong, and why the energy emission savings arguments don't hold up, and for the EU and industrial background politics behind the bansee http//www.ceolas.net/#li1x onwards